Forum: Jail shouldn't go downtown

In deference to those who say we cant afford to build a jail now, I say we cannot afford to not build it now.

By Bob Dostal

The following are comments I presented to the Midland County Board of commissioners at their Sept. 16 meeting. I feel the information may be of interest to the broader public regarding the jail issue.

Midland County needs a new jail now. There has been enough studying, evaluation and discussion. Now you need to move on to the building step.

In deference to those who say we cant afford to build a jail now, I say we cannot afford to not build it now. Studies presented to you indicate that waiting 6 years to start construction will cost the county and we taxpayers an additional $6 million. We need to start building the jail now.

I have refrained from becoming involved in the siting process because that is the role of you as commissioners and not the Advisory Board that I had served on. However, I feel compelled to comment on the proposal appearing recently in the in the Midland Daily News to "build jail space downtown and build just enough to meet short-term needs."

This is a totally unacceptable proposal and one that we taxpayers will be paying the resultant higher operating costs for the next 30 to 40 years.

Building a smaller jail just big enough to meet the countys short-term needs is setting up an unacceptable situation where: 1) the county will have to build another jail addition before the first is paid for and, 2) the county will have two jails to operate, which entails significantly higher operating costs for the years ahead.

The proposed new jail of 244 beds is based on a 3 percent inmate growth rate, compared to a historical growth rate of more than 6 percent. The new jail would be at capacity in 20 years when the jail-building bond is paid off. Any increase above a 3 percent growth rate, which is highly likely to occur, will require additional capacity before the 20-year payoff period is completed. Any smaller jail than 244 beds will only accelerate the time by which your successors will have to build additional capacity. This would occur in 10 years or even five years depending on the size of jail built initially. This is a totally unacceptable legacy for you to leave to your successors.

The downtown location provides inadequate space for building a modern, cost efficient, and high technology jail. The recent 244-bed proposal by the Justifiable Jail Committee reveals: 1) a need for purchasing land from the hotel, which has declined to sell property, 2) potential interference with the M-20 bridge, which is to be lowered and widened in the near future, 3) probable higher construction and operating costs, 4) no low capital alternatives for future jail expansions and county facility growth, 5) no land available for low-cost building expansions and 6) significant visual changes to the Midland skyline when entering the city via M-20.

Building a small jail on this site would set the county up for even more difficulty on future expansions and thus the necessity for another jail at another site. Having two jail sites forces duplication of staffing and the attendant higher operating costs we taxpayers will be paying for over the next 30 or 40 years.

These factors strongly suggest to me that building a new jail of 244 bed capacity now at a site other than downtown is the most cost effective proposal for we taxpayers in Midland county. I encourage you to move on with that decision.

Bob Dostal is a Midland resident and the former chairman of two jail advisory studies.